Fallout 4

[Jeb_CC]

You guys are judging this game really harshly and it hasn't even come out yet. ._.

I don't think you can really make assumptions when it's a game in development.

[K4_Kydure]

By that same logic we can't criticize Early Access games. Which is stupid since that's how they make improvements based on user feed back. In the end no amount of criticism will make a difference since Todd Howard hates us.

[Descriptor]

This is the same for weapon condition

 

Once again, if that was the case why is there outright nothing showing it there?

 

 

 

 

To be fair, I think the complex weapon modding system might be the reason for no weapon degradation. And who knows, maybe there is degradation but it's mod-based instead of whole weapon based. I say +1 wait on this one.

 

and the Rust-like building system. (there were mods to create your own fortress in NV and Skyrim, but they can't begin to compare to the way it's apparently done in 4) Oh, and let's not forget the physics!

 

If I wanted to play a mediocre survival building game, I'd play a mediocre survival building game. Not a crappy attempt to cash in on that market by Bethesda in a game it has no business belonging in. Though I suppose that makes up for completely ruining it as an RPG to appeal to the masses huh?

Honestly, I don't think it's all that out of place in a Fallout game.

If anything, it's really nice because it actually makes scavenging a lot more complex, since common junk now has some real value.

Overall, it actually adds a lot to the gameplay even beyond just the building aspect.

 

No matter what you do or don't do, there will ALWAYS be a horde of screaming cunts declaring the franchise to be ruined forever.

Because they are. Bethesda bought an IP that was great, dumbed it down to appeal to morons that wanted to seem intelligent by calling the abortion an "RPG", and completely took a shit all over the universe that Black Isle established. If Fallout 4 was true to the previous games, I can tell you right now that there would've been a fire bomb that goes right through the player character's window before the bombs fell.

 

But who cares about that when a game is epik fun amirite? only nerdz care about that kinda stuff xDDDDDDDD

Man, the salt is strong with this one.

First off, let me say this. As great as Fallout 1 and 2 was in terms of narrative and world building, in terms of gameplay, they left a lot to be desired. Combat was incredibly tedious, and the interface was often rather obtuse. Complexity isn't always a good thing in a game if it's not conveyed well, as that can just as easily take a player out of the world than it can draw them in.

And while yes, the story in Fallout 3 could have used some work, it was nowhere as bad as you're making it out to be. Go ahead, give me some instances of what Fallout 3 did wrong, in your opinion.

 

As for your last comment, I have no idea where you are drawing that from. Why do you think a fire bomb would burst through your window? Are you referring to the uneasy political situation in America at the time?

 

By that same logic we can't criticize Early Access games. Which is stupid since that's how they make improvements based on user feed back. In the end no amount of criticism will make a difference since Todd Howard hates us.

That's a poor analogy. At least you can actually play an Early Access game to be able to judge it. Here, we still have limited information. While signs do point to issues regarding the dialogue choices, loss of skills, and general story concerns, we still have nowhere near enough information to declare a verdict. It's more like judging an early access game by the trailer than it is honest criticism, since we simply aren't in the position to know yet.

[BTGBullseye]

Which is cute and all, but so far there's way more evidence showing that there won't be any skills at all, or outright be gone as we know them and abandoned for a system like Skyrim's which would be a bunch of dog shit.

Would you mind providing this 'evidence'? It was not shown in any of the E3 footage. (and why is the Skyrim system receiving so much vitriol from you?)

 

The old games would be nice enough to have a huge obvious tab showing "HEY THIS IS WHERE YOUR SKILLS GO!" and have the SPECIAL skill descriptions actually state what skills they modify, hell the fact that agility directly somehow sets how sneaky you are only reinforces that skills got removed.

Actually, it only showed that tab if you were on the right screen of the PipBoy... If you weren't, you didn't see it.

 

And I hope if you customize an energy weapon at all, the Brotherhood of steel would want to slice your heart and guts out.

It certainly looked like the Brotherhood was your enemy, at least in the video that showed the player shooting down a Brotherhood Vertibird with a missile...

 

If I wanted to play a mediocre survival building game, I'd play a mediocre survival building game. Not a crappy attempt to cash in on that market by Bethesda in a game it has no business belonging in. Though I suppose that makes up for completely ruining it as an RPG to appeal to the masses huh?

All you've seen is video of it, and haven't even seen any actual gameplay, so why do you assume it will be a poor quality system? Even the mods for building were far better than Rust ever was at building things.

 

You're making tons of assumptions with no actual evidence, and even arguing about it... Don't. It makes you sound like an idiot, and I'm fairly certain you aren't.

 

You guys are judging this game really harshly and it hasn't even come out yet. ._.

I don't think you can really make assumptions when it's a game in development.

+1

 

To be fair, I think the complex weapon modding system might be the reason for no weapon degradation. And who knows, maybe there is degradation but it's mod-based instead of whole weapon based. I say +1 wait on this one.

That actually sounds really cool. Have the mods degrade over time... It's also possible that the degrading isn't implemented in the UI yet. Just have to wait and see. +1

 

Honestly, I don't think it's all that out of place in a Fallout game.

If anything, it's really nice because it actually makes scavenging a lot more complex, since common junk now has some real value.

Overall, it actually adds a lot to the gameplay even beyond just the building aspect.

From what I saw and heard from the E3 footage was that you were essentially building multiple towns from nothing, and it was merely a side note to the rest of the game. I'd love to be able to build a couple sentry turret stations, then lure enemies into their fire zones in a game... Appeals to the side of me that doesn't want to waste my own personal ammo.

 

Man, the salt is strong with this one.

First off, let me say this. As great as Fallout 1 and 2 was in terms of narrative and world building, in terms of gameplay, they left a lot to be desired. Combat was incredibly tedious, and the interface was often rather obtuse. Complexity isn't always a good thing in a game if it's not conveyed well, as that can just as easily take a player out of the world than it can draw them in.

And while yes, the story in Fallout 3 could have used some work, it was nowhere as bad as you're making it out to be. Go ahead, give me some instances of what Fallout 3 did wrong, in your opinion.

+1

 

As for your last comment, I have no idea where you are drawing that from. Why do you think a fire bomb would burst through your window? Are you referring to the uneasy political situation in America at the time?

That made absolutely no sense to me either. First thing I thought he might've meant was the light from the nukes hitting before the shockwave, but that can't be it since it's supposedly BEFORE the bombs dropped...

 

That's a poor analogy. At least you can actually play an Early Access game to be able to judge it. Here, we still have limited information. While signs do point to issues regarding the dialogue choices, loss of skills, and general story concerns, we still have nowhere near enough information to declare a verdict. It's more like judging an early access game by the trailer than it is honest criticism, since we simply aren't in the position to know yet.

+1

 

Early Access is basically Open Beta testing. Fallout 4 is not even close to an Open test, (from what I can tell) and quite probably is still in Alpha.

 

Alpha = Early builds for completing the engine, general story, general gameplay mechanics.

Open Alpha = Usually not done by games, is used for optimizing core code and stability for numerous systems.

Beta = Stability testing, item balancing, story refinement, gameplay tweaks.

Open Beta = Primarily for MMOs to test their server stability, and sometimes item balance or minor tweaks.

Release = All major stability issues eliminated, gameplay complete, story complete, you will see many videos on youtube showing gameplay, etc.

 

Without unedited gameplay footage, there is absolutely no way to be certain of ANYTHING. (look at how many games were radically different from their E3 previews in the past, and quit complaining about things you can't possibly know)

[SC]

To be fair, I think the complex weapon modding system might be the reason for no weapon degradation. And who knows, maybe there is degradation but it's mod-based instead of whole weapon based. I say +1 wait on this one.

 

Understand the sketchiness of design choices stems from the fact that Bethesda already showed their intention of dumbing down their games to appeal to a dumber audience. Skyrim was likely the worst offender of this due to cutting weapon durability as well as attributes, which have always been a staple of character creation since Arena. And so far from what we've seen implies that skills got cut, the SPECIAL description is the worst offender to that. Intelligence; which previously determined skill points on a level up now states that it effects your XP gained effectively turning it into a useless dump stat. Agility also stating that it directly affects your ability to sneak. A similar system was put into place with Skyrim, because of the absence of personality which was the attribute that had the effect of directly setting how NPCs would act towards you; higher meaning much warmer and friendlier. While speechcraft effected your skill with persuasion. With Skyrim they just nuked personality with all the other attributes and had speechcraft affect both your persuasion AND NPC dispositions.

 

Overall, it actually adds a lot to the gameplay even beyond just the building aspect.

 

It's just a cheap attempt to cash in on the huge influx of crappy survival games. And that's all it does, again appeal to morons with the dumbest of gimmicks that offer nothing in terms of the actual game's world beyond your little dome of base building.

 

Combat was incredibly tedious, and the interface was often rather obtuse. Complexity isn't always a good thing in a game if it's not conveyed well, as that can just as easily take a player out of the world than it can draw them in.

 

Exactly what was wrong with the combat? Anyone that played a single tabletop RPG knew exactly how it worked, and even if the player didn't the game explained perfectly clear what a particular stat did with your character.

 

give me some instances of what Fallout 3 did wrong, in your opinion.

 

This list is huge but I'll sum it up.

 

A company that bought an IP with little to no knowledge of what they were actually buying and had no affiliation with the series before the deal. Fallout 3 is a binary storyline where your goal is just to participate in a war between a very black and white idea of "good" and "evil". With literally only a hand full of choices having any impact on the world around you, and most are very minor choices such as returning Agatha's family violin. The REAL decision making of using the FEV virus or not and who enters the chamber, and at the end of the day has no real penalty or punishment for the player other than a useless little meter saying "You lost karma", once again portraying a very simple and crappy view of how "good guys" and "bad guys" work when really this has never been a thing in Fallout which was always just varying shades of gray. The world is very barren after 200 years, somehow there's still an ugly green tinge that implies the bombs just fell and we're supposed to believe that humans have survived this long just scavenging on loose scraps from prewar ruins? Are you fucking kidding me? There are no mass trade routes and no signs of farming and what you do in the world doesn't matter beyond a scolding by Liam Neeson and once again, a useless little meter that tells you what you did is bad/good. The Companions you meet have no depth to them and aren't involved in any major quests or have an impact on the game or your ending.

 

The world simply revolves around the player and blows sunshine up their ass.

 

As for your last comment, I have no idea where you are drawing that from. Why do you think a fire bomb would burst through your window? Are you referring to the uneasy political situation in America at the time?

 

You realize it was significantly worse than simple political tensions right? There was mass rioting, looting, a deadly virus spreading in the population, and just a general "fuck the gobment" attitude going on across the entire United states. What we saw was a typical 50s sitcom neighborhood with the war SUDDENLY HAPPENING.

 

since we simply aren't in the position to know yet.

 

We're still allowed to critique based on what it appears until an official statement otherwise denounces or confirms what we see.

[BTGBullseye]

We're still allowed to critique based on what it appears until an official statement otherwise denounces or confirms what we see.

You're also allowed to stick a fork in a power outlet... Doesn't mean you should.

[rairii]

We're still allowed to critique based on what it appears until an official statement otherwise denounces or confirms what we see.

You're also allowed to stick a fork in a power outlet... Doesn't mean you should.

 

It's really like you have nothing else to talk about. You're comparing forming an opinion about a game based on what's seen of it, (a totally reasonable thing to do, mind you) to the act of frying your insides and killing yourself. You may as well admit you're wrong at this point. It's like you ditching that TF2 argument because you didn't have jack shit to say in your defense. Fact of the matter is, there's a lot of hype for Fallout 4, people were wanting a Fallout 4 for years and now they're getting one. You and everyone else trying to defend this game are only doing so in the fact that Fallout hasn't seen a sequel in nearly 5 years and you want your fix no matter how fucking garbage it is.

[Descriptor]

To be fair, I think the complex weapon modding system might be the reason for no weapon degradation. And who knows, maybe there is degradation but it's mod-based instead of whole weapon based. I say +1 wait on this one.

 

Understand the sketchiness of design choices stems from the fact that Bethesda already showed their intention of dumbing down their games to appeal to a dumber audience. Skyrim was likely the worst offender of this due to cutting weapon durability as well as attributes, which have always been a staple of character creation since Arena. And so far from what we've seen implies that skills got cut, the SPECIAL description is the worst offender to that. Intelligence; which previously determined skill points on a level up now states that it effects your XP gained effectively turning it into a useless dump stat. Agility also stating that it directly affects your ability to sneak. A similar system was put into place with Skyrim, because of the absence of personality which was the attribute that had the effect of directly setting how NPCs would act towards you; higher meaning much warmer and friendlier. While speechcraft effected your skill with persuasion. With Skyrim they just nuked personality with all the other attributes and had speechcraft affect both your persuasion AND NPC dispositions.

While I certainly do agree that skills as we knew them aren't in the game, I still get the feeling that they aren't completely removed. I think it might just be rank based, rather than point based. I mean, think about it. In the previous games, a lot of skills were just used for very specific actions, like hacking or lockpicking or passing speech checks. A rank based system would essentially accomplish the same thing (i.e., you need Science rank 3 to hack "average" computers, for instance). I mean, we have seen a bobblehead in game for Barter, so we know at least something skill related is there. And while it may be seen as "dumbing down" (which is elitist as hell, btw), it's still probably pretty functional. I say we still have to wait until proven different.

Also, they might have also stopped Intellegence from affecting skills to nerf it a bit, since it was way too overpowered before.

Overall, it actually adds a lot to the gameplay even beyond just the building aspect.

 

It's just a cheap attempt to cash in on the huge influx of crappy survival games. And that's all it does, again appeal to morons with the dumbest of gimmicks that offer nothing in terms of the actual game's world beyond your little dome of base building.

So what? It still looks like it's reasonably fleshed out and will be pretty entertaining. What the hell is wrong with having some more free-form fun? Like I said, it does affect gameplay because it forces you to rethink how you scavenge stuff, which is a big part of the game. Additionally, it provides a way for you to get additional benefits, like special items and additional trading locations. And for the last time, it's not out of place. It's gameplay revolving around re-building in a post-apocalyptic world. I can certainly think of game conventions that would be far more misplaced than that.

Combat was incredibly tedious, and the interface was often rather obtuse. Complexity isn't always a good thing in a game if it's not conveyed well, as that can just as easily take a player out of the world than it can draw them in.

 

Exactly what was wrong with the combat? Anyone that played a single tabletop RPG knew exactly how it worked, and even if the player didn't the game explained perfectly clear what a particular stat did with your character.

Admittedly, a lot of it is subjective, in that I'm not that big of a fan of turn-based dice-role based RPGs, but at the same time, it still wasn't an entirely smooth experience. Stuff like Ian constantly shooting you in the back, the usual RPG mechanic of trying to hit a rat or scorpion or something for like 5 minutes (while playing the "gimme three steps towards the door" game for every turn to avoid losing health) and always missing (which was pretty tedious in Morrowind, too), as well as the isometric perspective giving a poor idea of line of site for gunplay (which also played into Ian shooting me in the back a lot). Also, one thing that got me was never being entirely sure of how my character would navigate the floor grid in combat, which would cause me to eat up my action points unintentionally. Admittedly, again, a lot of it is subjective and a fair deal a result of my lack of RPG skill, but at the end of the day, it caused me to dread combat more than anything, and as a result, hurt the games for me a fair deal.

give me some instances of what Fallout 3 did wrong, in your opinion.

 

This list is huge but I'll sum it up.

 

A company that bought an IP with little to no knowledge of what they were actually buying and had no affiliation with the series before the deal. Fallout 3 is a binary storyline where your goal is just to participate in a war between a very black and white idea of "good" and "evil". With literally only a hand full of choices having any impact on the world around you, and most are very minor choices such as returning Agatha's family violin. The REAL decision making of using the FEV virus or not and who enters the chamber, and at the end of the day has no real penalty or punishment for the player other than a useless little meter saying "You lost karma", once again portraying a very simple and crappy view of how "good guys" and "bad guys" work when really this has never been a thing in Fallout which was always just varying shades of gray. The world is very barren after 200 years, somehow there's still an ugly green tinge that implies the bombs just fell and we're supposed to believe that humans have survived this long just scavenging on loose scraps from prewar ruins? Are you fucking kidding me? There are no mass trade routes and no signs of farming and what you do in the world doesn't matter beyond a scolding by Liam Neeson and once again, a useless little meter that tells you what you did is bad/good. The Companions you meet have no depth to them and aren't involved in any major quests or have an impact on the game or your ending.

 

The world simply revolves around the player and blows sunshine up their ass.

Ah, good. I was worried you would just say something like "they ruined the BOS", even though they actually explained their motivations. And yeah, you do make some fair points here. I will definitely agree that NV had a better story compared to 3, but I think you're still being pretty harsh on Bethesda in your analysis. I mean, at the very least, flaws aside, I would still say that of all the companies to get the IP, they were still better suited for it than most (outside of Obsidian, of course). You act like they just took the Fallout IP as a quick cash grab, but you'd have to be a real cynic (which I honestly kinda suspect, reading most of you response) to say that they put no effort into it. Heck, looking at a number of other E3 interviews about Fallout 4, it sounds like they are still taking a lot of concerns about Fallout 3 into question. For instance, the fact that the green tint is gone, which I'm sure a lot of folks are happy about. Todd also mentioned putting greater thought into giving consequences to player actions, so maybe the story will be more along the lines of NV. And yeah, that's just conjecture, but again, that's really all we have to work with here.

 

As for the capital wasteland's level of civilization after 200 years, it's not as unbelievable as you may think. Based on context clues of conversations and histories in F3, it definitely seems to imply that most actual settlements weren't started until within a century, which kinda implies that the Capital Wasteland was just kinda un-inhabited for a while. Which isn't entirely out of question, considering it was likely hit worse than most places, being the nation's capital and all. Combine that with the unchecked super mutant threat and general chaos, and it's not that out of the question for things to be kinda awful. I always likened the area as being a good indication as to what someplace like the Boneyard would have been like if the Vault Dweller never came along to basically fix everything forever.

Which actually brings me to my next point. If you looks at the series, the biggest advancements in civilization always seem to come around due to the events of the games in the series. I mean, think about New Vegas before the NCR rolled into town. That place was radiation free and in good shape, but didn't seem to have much civilization outside of tribals. What's the deal there? And even Ceasar's Legion is a consequence of the first two games, since Ceasar himself is only able to do what he does due to the stability of the Boneyard (where he's from). Meanwhile, the east coast has been relatively deprived of games bringing about wasteland saviors, so it's not out of the question that things have been going pretty badly.

 

As for food and stuff, it is mentioned off hand (or at least hinted to) that a lot of the food in the CW comes from trading, hunting, scavenging (since pre-war food is pretty much nothing but preservatives (and are in NV, too, so don't start) and is in great supply since there would have been a city's worth of food left for a very small amount of people), and hydroponics (in Rivet City), as they do state that agriculture is at best a crapshoot due to the lack of clean water for irrigation (and yes, plants in this series are sensitive to radiation. The Shi in Fallout 2 say as much, with radiation-resistant crops being one of their larger advancements). While it's not as comprehensive as NV at fleshing this out, it's not completely ignored. And if the settlement building montage in the F4 trailer is anything to go by, food will be better represented for settlements there, too.

Additionally, considering the relatively small size of the map in F3 compared to F1&2, the amount of settlements aren't too terrible per land area. Like I said, it's honestly pretty comparable to the Boneyard if that place didn't have help from the NCR (as, afterall, keep in mind that in NV, they say it does still kinda suck there even with the NCR's influence in rebuilding).

 

As for your last comment, I have no idea where you are drawing that from. Why do you think a fire bomb would burst through your window? Are you referring to the uneasy political situation in America at the time?

 

You realize it was significantly worse than simple political tensions right? There was mass rioting, looting, a deadly virus spreading in the population, and just a general "fuck the gobment" attitude going on across the entire United states. What we saw was a typical 50s sitcom neighborhood with the war SUDDENLY HAPPENING.

I know all that. But that doesn't mean that every house in the country is going to get necessarily firebombed. Massive rioting and looting have happened in this country a number of times throughout it's history, but the fact is, while widely reported, it's still generally pretty isolated. If you weren't near the riots, your life would continue to go on as normal. The same thing with disease outbreaks. Thanks to some sneaky sleuthing based on screenshots, we know now that the main character lived north of Concord, MA before the war, meaning that he lived pretty far out from the city, where most of the worst of the rioting would occur. The fact is, in even the worst unrest, if they aren't in the middle of it, people will generally just try to keep living life like normal. Heck, if anything, the fact that getting tickets for a fallout shelter was seen as a rational thing to do implies that there wasn't certainly a mass apprehension going on. But the way you describe it implies that the society has pretty much collapsed already, with the nukes just being the cherry on top. Mass rioting=/Complete nationwide anarchy. Not to the level you're describing, anyway.

since we simply aren't in the position to know yet.

 

We're still allowed to critique based on what it appears until an official statement otherwise denounces or confirms what we see.

Sure, you're allowed. It's just all hot air, though.

 

We're still allowed to critique based on what it appears until an official statement otherwise denounces or confirms what we see.

You're also allowed to stick a fork in a power outlet... Doesn't mean you should.

 

It's really like you have nothing else to talk about. You're comparing forming an opinion about a game based on what's seen of it, (a totally reasonable thing to do, mind you) to the act of frying your insides and killing yourself. You may as well admit you're wrong at this point. It's like you ditching that TF2 argument because you didn't have jack shit to say in your defense. Fact of the matter is, there's a lot of hype for Fallout 4, people were wanting a Fallout 4 for years and now they're getting one. You and everyone else trying to defend this game are only doing so in the fact that Fallout hasn't seen a sequel in nearly 5 years and you want your fix no matter how fucking garbage it is.

But see, this is exactly his point. You've basically already decided it's garbage despite having a very limited perspective. There's discussion and critique, and then there's just downright condemnation based on conjecture.

I certainly agree about having apprehension about certain design decisions, but you can't act like it's automatically complete crap without taking the chance to look at how those decisions play into the larger picture. Especially when we aren't even sure that those decisions are even what they are yet. Everyone is acting so ridiculously hostile about this that it's almost silly.

[Blightmare]

My biggest fear for this thread is that it's gonna become a hostile place for anyone who will happen to enjoy the game. Everyone who doesn't seem to like it is being awfully intimidating in the presentation of their distaste.

 

I will say I am genuinely surprised though. Never before have I seen such passionate backlash after a mere trailer. I mean I've seen similar in the past a lot but never anything this intense so fast.

[Seattleite]

They just hate that it isn't being made by Black Isle, hence them outright fabricating things to hate. Ignore them, Rarity. They aren't worth your energy, my energy, or anybody else's. That's why I haven't posted here again.

[BTGBullseye]

It's like you ditching that TF2 argument because you didn't have jack shit to say in your defense.

I actually have plenty to say, but I wasn't about to drop into an argument hosted by a dick to do it. However, that is entirely off topic.

 

They just hate that it isn't being made by Black Isle, hence them outright fabricating things to hate. Ignore them, Rarity. They aren't worth your energy, my energy, or anybody else's. That's why I haven't posted here again.

+1000

 

Looks like I'll probly be out of this thread too, for a while at least.

[rairii]

I actually have plenty to say, but I wasn't about to drop into an argument hosted by a dick to do it. However, that is entirely off topic.

It's about as on-topic as your fork comment, and keep in mind nobody in that thread was being a dick.

[Seattleite]

I actually have plenty to say, but I wasn't about to drop into an argument hosted by a dick to do it. However, that is entirely off topic.

It's about as on-topic as your fork comment, and keep in mind nobody in that thread was being a dick.

 

It's as on-topic as when you brought it up, so how about you turn that finger you're pointing right around?

[K4_Kydure]

They just hate that it isn't being made by Black Isle, hence them outright fabricating things to hate. Ignore them, Rarity. They aren't worth your energy, my energy, or anybody else's. That's why I haven't posted here again.

 

I don't hate it because it isn't being made by Obsidian. While it would be nice I would be perfectly fine with Bethesda making it if they actually cared about the integrity of series and didn't want to fix a system that isn't broken. Never once did anyone in this thread say that Fallout 4 is shit based on what we've seen, only that we're concerned that Bethesda may be taking the game in the wrong direction that would lead to a less in depth experience. Much how Skyrim had no real depth to it's world, game play, or quests.

 

I have also noticed that the discussion of anything really goes down hill when you show up. You're an immovable object of obstructiveness who can't seem to take any criticism and act like you know more on any subject than anyone else regardless of how much time they put into themselves. ie: Telling people to 'shove off' when all they did was simply make a suggestion to use a different engine. Even when that person knows what they're talking about and has said they don't want you to dumb down your game if Bethesda actually removes core elements from Fallout.

 

Since you insist on riding that high horse of yours why don't you take it and ride off into the sunset since the forum was better off without you.

 

I actually have plenty to say, but I wasn't about to drop into an argument hosted by a dick to do it. However, that is entirely off topic.

It's about as on-topic as your fork comment, and keep in mind nobody in that thread was being a dick.

It's as on-topic as when you brought it up, so how about you turn that finger you're pointing right around?

One last thing, BTG, when someone is abrasive it doesn't mean their a dick. If you have something to add to the discussion then say something, just try not to be a dick about it.

 

Now that my post has also gotten off topic lets make this the last one that does and leave the discussion to SC and Descriptor (And anyone else who can actually contribute something.) since they're the only ones actually discussing the topic at hand.

[Seattleite]

I don't hate it because it isn't being made by Obsidian. While it would be nice I would be perfectly fine with Bethesda making it if they actually cared about the integrity of series and didn't want to fix a system that isn't broken.

 

Given that, with the exception of the vertibird error (which I hope they fix), ALL of your criticisms are unconfirmed and some of them (like there not being skills) are outright fabricated, I find it hard to believe that you hate it for any actual reason to do with the game itself.

 

Never once did anyone in this thread say that Fallout 4 is shit based on what we've seen, only that we're concerned that Bethesda may be taking the game in the wrong direction that would lead to a less in depth experience.

 

You're the worst fucking liar I've ever met.

 

They also screwed up the lore already with there being a vertibird in a prewar scene. If you didn't know vertibirds weren't finished until post war by the Enclave, so if Bethesda can't get something that basic right I can only imagine how bad the story is going to be this time.

 

RIP Fallout. There are so many things wrong in the E3 showcase I don't know where to start.

 

We can do that. Looking back it's really disgusting and apparent how they're blatantly trying to kill any and all roleplaying aspects that made the game what it is. I mean like you said Skills looking like they got the axe, forcing the player character into a role they can't really do much about. Also looks like they nuked weapon condition, and for whatever reason they decided to make crits a button you can press to get guaranteed criticals rather a dice role like an actual RPG.

 

Really seems a lot of appealing to the lowest common denominator with the whole "Call of Duty is an RPG and we want that audience!"

 

Because they are. Bethesda bought an IP that was great, dumbed it down to appeal to morons that wanted to seem intelligent by calling the abortion an "RPG", and completely took a shit all over the universe that Black Isle established. If Fallout 4 was true to the previous games, I can tell you right now that there would've been a fire bomb that goes right through the player character's window before the bombs fell.

 

But who cares about that when a game is epik fun amirite? only nerdz care about that kinda stuff xDDDDDDDD

 

In the end no amount of criticism will make a difference since Todd Howard hates us.

 

Fact of the matter is, there's a lot of hype for Fallout 4, people were wanting a Fallout 4 for years and now they're getting one. You and everyone else trying to defend this game are only doing so in the fact that Fallout hasn't seen a sequel in nearly 5 years and you want your fix no matter how fucking garbage it is.

 

Every single one of these is exactly, undeniably what you said nobody has done. And half of them are from you alone.

 

Much how Skyrim had no real depth to it's world, game play, or quests.

 

Oh, really? Despite them making sure all the major questlies had actual stories, unlike a certain previous game (*cough*OBLIVION*cough*), dropped more lore than both of the two previous games combined, and added some meaningful choices to your combat actions beyond your equipment selection? The only system that got shallower was character creation, and yeah I fucking agree with you on that.

 

I have also noticed that the discussion of anything really goes down hill when you show up.

 

Convenient how this "observation" is made only when I disagree with you.

 

You're an immovable object of obstructiveness who can't seem to take any criticism and act like you know more on any subject than anyone else regardless of how much time they put into themselves.

 

You're projecting so much you could point your head at a wall and show off powerpoint presentations. I have always been more open to criticism than you, and you're the one who can't handle the fact that people can disagree with you on something as meaningless as their taste in video games.

 

ie: Telling people to 'shove off' when all they did was simply make a suggestion to use a different engine.

 

A suggestion made entirely on faulty information, with a level of hostility that showed up in his second post and appeared to be quickly increasing. Also, it's my fucking mod, and I've got a lot of experience working with Bethesda's modding kits, so I know much more about it than he does and you could only possibly say I don't because you don't give a damn whether something is true or not when you want to believe it, which your every word since you started this thread has already shown. When I say something outright cannot be done in New Vegas, overwhelming odds are I'm right. Especially since everybody I've talked to on the Nexus about incorporating these systems into New Vegas back when I was actually trying to do it, several of which are extremely experienced scripters, has told me and explained at length why things like custom resistances and bleed mechanics are impossible in New Vegas.

 

Even when that person knows what they're talking about and has said they don't want you to dumb down your game if Bethesda actually removes core elements from Fallout.

 

1. No, he doesn't know what he's talking about. Nobody does, the game isn't out yet and there's been no related official statements.

2. There was no "if" anywhere in there, SC is 100% convinced that if he doesn't see skills, they don't exist.

3. Even if skills are cut, it's still a massive net gain. Losing skills is not bad enough to outweigh gaining extra resistances, bleed mechanics, the ability to do all sorts of crazy special effects (and even add in entire new gameplay mechanics) with hidden perks, home construction, vehicles, what appears to be a totally different system for power armour, more comprehensive weapon modding, part-specific armour, separate defence scores for different attack types and possibly the ability (with some clever scripting) to switch between characters.

 

Since you insist on riding that high horse of yours why don't you take it and ride off into the sunset since the forum was better off without you.

 

I'm not on a high horse, and you're a deceitful bitch who outright lies through her teeth when anybody can look back one page and disprove her. If anybody should be leaving, it's you. Nobody needs a brazen, blatant liar who is immediately hostile to any opinion on any thing that differs from her own.

 

One last thing, BTG, when someone is abrasive it doesn't mean their a dick.

 

Think real hard on that.

 

If you have something to add to the discussion then say something, just try not to be a dick about it.

 

Because we should just leave that kind of behaviour to you, right? None of us got nasty until you did. And I do mean you, specifically.

 

Now that my post has also gotten off topic lets make this the last one that does and leave the discussion to SC and Descriptor (And anyone else who can actually contribute something.) since they're the only ones actually discussing the topic at hand.

 

BTG and I are also contributing to the discussion, and considerably so. We just happen to disagree with you strongly, and aren't being as diplomatic about it as Descriptor. I think Rarity was dead on when she assessed the direction this thread was going.

 

My biggest fear for this thread is that it's gonna become a hostile place for anyone who will happen to enjoy the game. Everyone who doesn't seem to like it is being awfully intimidating in the presentation of their distaste.

 

Yeah, it is. Fucking quickly, too, and for exactly that reason.

[SC]

i love circle jerks.

[Seattleite]

i love circle jerks.

 

Yeah, sorry to interrupt the one you and Kydure were having.

[Blightmare]

This thread long past locking qualifications from just about everyone in it.

[K4_Kydure]

Agreed, I just want a mod to delete the thread entirely since we can't have nice things since certain people can't shut up.

[Seattleite]

Yeah, if only you could shut up and let other people have opinions. But deleting the thread would only serve to hide how you behave, so I'm not in favour of that.